Project Godus reaches Kickstarter goal just under the wire

God game revival now working toward stretch goals, including Linux support.

Peter Molyneux is likely sleeping a little easier these days. The Kickstarter for Project Godus, Molyneux's effort to revive the largely ignored god game genre, has passed its £450,000 ($732,510) funding goal.

After a rough start that seems to have put a dent in Molyneux's usually boundless enthusiasm, the project officially met its funding goal with slightly more than two days left to go. In the last day of fundraising, 22cans is now working toward new stretch goals, including additional single-player games modes, multiplayer co-op, and Linux/Ouya support.

"The whole 22cans team is over the moon about your support for our vision," Molyneux wrote in a recent update. "Thank you so much for backing us successfully. We are now able to make GODUS, and because we couldn't have done it without you, we are now going to do it with you! Enjoy the ride—it's going to be fantastic."

While a playable prototype for the game has not yet been released as recently promised, the 22cans team did deliver an extended video demonstrating an early multiplayer prototype, showing off the game's dynamic landscape editing. The video also features Molyneux implying that he is fated to win because he is the "father of the god game," which might be the best bit of trash talk we've ever heard.

Kyle Orland
Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area. Emailkyle.orland@arstechnica.com//Twitter@KyleOrl

34 Reader Comments

Molyneux insists he is no longer over-promising on this particular project, while at the same time failing to deliver on his promise of a playable demo last Friday. You'd think getting that demo out before the Kickstarter finishes would be of critical importance, and it still wasn't done.

Compare these promises from Fable 1 (supposed to be the most ground-breaking, immersive experience of all time) to the simplistic action RPG we received.

-Online multiplayer-You could plant a tree and watch it grow in real time-You could cut down a tree-Armor and clothing would come in different sizes so you couldn't wear everything you found-Real aging not aging by level-If you killed some kids parents the kid would eventually grow up to try and hunt you down.-Free roam, apparently one game tester got "lost in the woods for 15 minutes", supposedly on scale with Morrowind-Having to compete with other heroes around the world as well as villains (good/bad heroes more or less)-Ability to raise a family-If you were to clear a clearing next to a town of monsters or whatever, bandits might possibly move in and raid the town every once and a while for loots-Become a werewolf (balvarine)-Ability to actually be a villain, as in join the bandits or dark side, not just do bad things and then finish the same story-Ability to craft weapons and armor and color them yourself-Gained "experience" by doing things, for example you actually built muscle from lifting heavy weapons, no stats so to say

I was done with his games after Fable 1. It not only was nothing like what he promised, but it was a poor action-RPG. It was exceptionally linear. It didn't have a great story, not great action. The mechanics were completely broken.

You had an spell/ability that should shield you from damage, and you gained exponentially more experience if you racked up combos without taking damage. Together, it broke the entire game quickly.

I dont completely understand all the hate against peter, yes he promises to much but the games arent that bad.

We don't want to be sold a game while being told it is a Cadillac and take it home to find out it's a Gremlin or Pinto. Telling us all sorts of things we can do in a game (like the Fable example above) that when you take it home...yeah, not so much. That's false advertising. I think the only way he has avoided class action lawsuits is those promises always come in the form of interviews instead of advertisements.

Also, you must not have played Black & White. Couldn't complete the game due to a bug that was never fixed.

I was done with his games after Fable 1. It not only was nothing like what he promised, but it was a poor action-RPG. It was exceptionally linear. It didn't have a great story, not great action. The mechanics were completely broken.

You had an spell/ability that should shield you from damage, and you gained exponentially more experience if you racked up combos without taking damage. Together, it broke the entire game quickly.

Let's be real here fellas. Practically no games, especially those early in development, actually turn out exactly how the devs say they will. Regardless, you have to credit him for trying to work on something he is passionate about. I hope this turns out to be a good game, and a successful Kickstarter project.

Let's be real here fellas. Practically no games, especially those early in development, actually turn out exactly how the devs say they will. Regardless, you have to credit him for trying to work on something he is passionate about. I hope this turns out to be a good game, and a successful Kickstarter project.

Over-promising when a game is in development may lead to disappointment from gamers, and prompt ridicule, but it doesn't really hurt anyone. Gamers have a chance to read the reviews before they buy the game, and to see if it lives up to the claims.

But when your're asking gamers to actually fund the development? That's a totally different matter. If you have a track-record of over-promising and under-delivering, you shouldn't be surprised if your Kickstarter project just barely scrapes over the line, despite looking impressive.

I was done with his games after Fable 1. It not only was nothing like what he promised, but it was a poor action-RPG. It was exceptionally linear. It didn't have a great story, not great action. The mechanics were completely broken.

You had an spell/ability that should shield you from damage, and you gained exponentially more experience if you racked up combos without taking damage. Together, it broke the entire game quickly.

Let's be real here fellas. Practically no games, especially those early in development, actually turn out exactly how the devs say they will. Regardless, you have to credit him for trying to work on something he is passionate about. I hope this turns out to be a good game, and a successful Kickstarter project.

He doesn't just fall slightly short of his promises, he doesn't deliver on almost any of them. The games he delivers are hollow shells compared to how he describes them.

War Z was just removed from Steam because the promise features aren't in fact there. People are furious and want their money back. But with Molyneux games, we're just supposed to expect now that very few promised features will be there.

I was done with his games after Fable 1. It not only was nothing like what he promised, but it was a poor action-RPG. It was exceptionally linear. It didn't have a great story, not great action. The mechanics were completely broken.

You had an spell/ability that should shield you from damage, and you gained exponentially more experience if you racked up combos without taking damage. Together, it broke the entire game quickly.

Let's be real here fellas. Practically no games, especially those early in development, actually turn out exactly how the devs say they will. Regardless, you have to credit him for trying to work on something he is passionate about. I hope this turns out to be a good game, and a successful Kickstarter project.

He doesn't just fall slightly short of his promises, he doesn't deliver on almost any of them. The games he delivers are hollow shells compared to how he describes them.

War Z was just removed from Steam because the promise features aren't in fact there. People are furious and want their money back. But with Molyneux games, we're just supposed to expect now that very few promised features will be there.

The difference here is that Peter over promises on unfinished games, the war z guys over promised on a final product.

I was done with his games after Fable 1. It not only was nothing like what he promised, but it was a poor action-RPG. It was exceptionally linear. It didn't have a great story, not great action. The mechanics were completely broken.

You had an spell/ability that should shield you from damage, and you gained exponentially more experience if you racked up combos without taking damage. Together, it broke the entire game quickly.

Let's be real here fellas. Practically no games, especially those early in development, actually turn out exactly how the devs say they will. Regardless, you have to credit him for trying to work on something he is passionate about. I hope this turns out to be a good game, and a successful Kickstarter project.

He doesn't just fall slightly short of his promises, he doesn't deliver on almost any of them. The games he delivers are hollow shells compared to how he describes them.

War Z was just removed from Steam because the promise features aren't in fact there. People are furious and want their money back. But with Molyneux games, we're just supposed to expect now that very few promised features will be there.

Precisely. It's one thing to over promise, under deliver and still put out a great game, its completely another to over promise under deliver and put out a turd like F..load screen...a....load screen...b...load screen...l...load screen...e...load screen.

With that being said, I'm still a fan of the god genre and since Will Wright no longer mainly focused on making video games there's not a lot of visionary talent left concerning themselves with the genre, so I will give it a chance while remaining skeptical, but there's no way I would have helped fund it.

While I didn't back it, because I think the gameplay is a bit over simplilistic, I would like to add a quote by Chris Roberts over at the recent StarCitizen update regarding Peter to offer a different perspective to people who were offended by Peter's promises in the past, which I agree somewhat. I absolutely loathe EA, I believe it has a part to play in every game's demise under its franchise.

Chris Roberts wrote:

I know there has been some blow back because a lot of people have felt let down by some of Peter’s promises in the past. I’ve known Peter for many years. Back when Origin and Bullfrog were acquired by EA and we used to travel the world on press tours promoting our respective games. He is definitely very enthusiastic, which can get him into trouble sometimes, as he can over promise, but it always comes from the right place – he wants to push the possibilities and he has a childlike wonder with doing this. And having been in the situation in the past, the fault with this doesn’t lie all at Peter’s feet. A lot of the reasons why promised features don’t make it into the final product are publisher driven. When Electronic Arts or Microsoft want a product on a certain date to make a financial quarter features get cut. The difference between Peter and a lot of other developers is that other developers are a lot more circumspect in public in disclosing what they’re trying to put in the game. Trust me, there are many lofty goals on most projects that never make it, Peter just is more public about his and sometimes gets caught out because of it, especially when there’s a hard date imposed by his publisher.

While I'm surprised he was actually able to get that kick starter going, I'm curious what's going to actually be released. While Fable 1 wasn't what it was promised to be, I actually had a lot of fun with that game and replayed it 2 or 3 times.

Black and White, OTOH, had soooooo much potential, but I gave up because of the bugs.

I dont completely understand all the hate against peter, yes he promises to much but the games arent that bad.

It's not that they "aren't that bad", it's that he doesn't just over-promise. He WAY over-promises. To hear him talk, Black & White, and Fable were going to be these revolutionary, ground breaking, genre-defining, epic pieces of software that would make every last man, woman and child on the planet rethink their very existence and their place in the universe!!!!!1! To call what he did hyperbole would be an insult to the definition of hyperbole.

Then when the games came out, and they not only didn't live up to his hype, they kind of sucked too. Or as you put it "aren't that bad". Hardly high praise.

I confess, I pirated Populous many years ago. I supported this kickstarter partly because I felt I owed him at least that much. Which doesn't even begin to repay all the fun (over and above the price I did pay) for games like Syndicate, Dungeon Keeper, Black & White and so on. Good luck 22Cans!

Syndicate was awesome, as was Dungeon Keeper 1. Attracting monsters, then possessing your favorite one to lead them all into battle was a whole lot of fun. Probably won't join the Kickstarter, but I may check out the final product.

Yet another one of many, many Kickstarters to suspiciously make their goal at the very last second.

I'm not saying anything fishy *actually* happened here, but think about it: when your goal has attracted enough backers to net you a majority of the money you want...how much would you pay for it? How tempting would it be to, say, gift some money to friends who then use that cash to complete your funding goal? Or maybe you have some spare LLCs lying around? If you could pay 10 grand to receive 100 grand, or 100 grand to receive 498 grand...why *wouldn't* you?

Yet another one of many, many Kickstarters to suspiciously make their goal at the very last second.

I'm not saying anything fishy *actually* happened here, but think about it: when your goal has attracted enough backers to net you a majority of the money you want...how much would you pay for it? How tempting would it be to, say, gift some money to friends who then use that cash to complete your funding goal? Or maybe you have some spare LLCs lying around? If you could pay 10 grand to receive 100 grand, or 100 grand to receive 498 grand...why *wouldn't* you?

That's possible, but I suspect it's also got a lot to do with Chris Roberts emailing Star Citizen supporters and bringing Godus to their (generous) attention. He also backed Elite and its funding has also leapt up in response (despite having weeks left to run).

Kickstarter should really incorporate stretch goals in their interface. I'd like to put some dollars toward a goal, but *only* if they make it - sort of like how they don't get my money if the project isn't funded.

This is especially true for architecture goals like the Linux/OUYA one.

I'm comfortable with the knowledge that Molyneux is pretty much solely responsible for the death of the god game genre. It's going to take a miracle to resurrect it and while Molyneux has promised miracles (and even managed to find a time to program a few)...he's never actually delivered one.

Yet another one of many, many Kickstarters to suspiciously make their goal at the very last second.

I'm not saying anything fishy *actually* happened here, but think about it: when your goal has attracted enough backers to net you a majority of the money you want...how much would you pay for it? How tempting would it be to, say, gift some money to friends who then use that cash to complete your funding goal? Or maybe you have some spare LLCs lying around? If you could pay 10 grand to receive 100 grand, or 100 grand to receive 498 grand...why *wouldn't* you?

I didn't even realize project GODUS was a kickstarter project until after they started publicizing that it wasn't getting funded. I thought it was just a game they were going to make. Increased coverage in games journals are probably the reason.

Yet another one of many, many Kickstarters to suspiciously make their goal at the very last second.

I'm not saying anything fishy *actually* happened here, but think about it: when your goal has attracted enough backers to net you a majority of the money you want...how much would you pay for it? How tempting would it be to, say, gift some money to friends who then use that cash to complete your funding goal? Or maybe you have some spare LLCs lying around? If you could pay 10 grand to receive 100 grand, or 100 grand to receive 498 grand...why *wouldn't* you?

I didn't even realize project GODUS was a kickstarter project until after they started publicizing that it wasn't getting funded. I thought it was just a game they were going to make. Increased coverage in games journals are probably the reason.

Human nature has a lot to do with it too. People aren't willing to risk the emotional exposure of supporting a project until it's either "now or never" or they have complete confidence in it.

If you look at Kickstarter funding trends, there's always a huge upswell of supporters towards the end of the period (and Obsidian's PayPal continued to be hit up feverishly even after the KS was over) because people hit that "now or never" decision point.

They're all like this. The believers flood in up front, there's a long period of people hearing about it and jumping in at a much lower rate than the initial flood, and then there's the closing period where everyone who heard about it but couldn't make the decision until forced dives in.

It's a discernible phenomena in basically any situation involving a significant decision and a group that must make it.

Ignoring history, the promise that they will release a playable demo the *next day*, and then never doing it is a huge sign to me that the Godus that PM thinks/says exists has already greatly diverged from what actually exists. If he can't accurately predict what 22Cans can do in 24 hours, then i have no confidence in what he says they will be able to do months down the road.

Frankly, I don't care that Peter Molyneux promises everything and delivers very little. Because there's usually something worth playing and paying for. I supported it because I would probably end up buying anyway and at the time it seemed unlikely that they would reach their goal. Molyneux is a typical example of somebody with a hell of alot creativity and ideas, but a poor ability to substantialize it. Hopefully, 22cans is smart enough to realize this.

Also it may not seem like it now since it was long ago but he actually has been responsible for some awesome games. And Godus looks awesome. Will it be the defining game of the century? No. Will it be worth what they charge for it? Probably. Hopefully it will bring new life to the god-genre. And if not, cheers to the team at 22cans for trying.